Bachmann is concerned about the rise of the SOVIET UNION

[Formaldehyde]

I consider Obama to have been thinking about wanting to visit all fifty states, so the fifty came out and then he remembered he meant 47. But the damage was done.

I htink there was no damage actually done. His intent was quite clear from the context of his remark, as others have pointed out.

One relates to foreign policy, one does not. Foreign policy being an important thing when you're a head of state. No mistakes allowed.

I think Bachmann calling Russia the Soviet Union was a similar mistake, although it was quite a bit more embarrassing due to the extreme change in their government and basic philosophy.

However, insinuating they are still some sort of vast threat to our welfare when they clearly are not is very important. I think someone who believes that shouldn't even be a congressman, much less the president or vice-president. Either she was deliberately generating propaganda to rationalize the size of the military-industrial complex, or she is still living in the past, or both. Her intent was also clear.

 

[BasketCase]

Especially hilarious (or sad?) is people excusing Obama's 57 but damning Bachmann on this. Or vice-versa.

What we're seeing is George Orwell's "four legs good, two legs bad" concept in action. And it's not unique to this thread, either. Conventional liberals, everywhere, will bend over backwards to forgive a Democrat for any given mistake, while hammering mercilessly on any Republican who commits the same kind of mistake.

Side note: everybody in here is assuming Bachmann's use of the words "Soviet Union was an accident. What if it wasn't......? It can be used as an insult akin to intentionally misspelling America's name with three K's instead of a C.

 

[aelf]

Side note: everybody in here is assuming Bachmann's use of the words "Soviet Union was an accident. What if it wasn't......? It can be used as an insult akin to intentionally misspelling America's name with three K's instead of a C.

Conservatives seem to like to offer this explanation. How does that make sense? Really, explain the semantics of this supposed insult to me. I'm curious.

If it's a mistake, it's a mistake. I don't know why people who are interested in pointing that out for oblique political reasons also try to suggest that it might have be intended. That's kinda contradictory.

 

[Ajidica]

What we're seeing is George Orwell's "four legs good, two legs bad" concept in action. And it's not unique to this thread, either. Conventional liberals, everywhere, will bend over backwards to forgive a Democrat for any given mistake, while hammering mercilessly on any Republican who commits the same kind of mistake.

I'm not hammering her for a single mistake. Rather, I'm hammering her for a consistant record of mistakes, hypocracy, and outright lies dating back from when she was a simple house member.
If a democrat has such a consistant record of 'mistakes' and outright lies then I would savage them just as much as I savage Bachmann.

 

[Traitorfish]

Side note: everybody in here is assuming Bachmann's use of the words "Soviet Union was an accident. What if it wasn't......? It can be used as an insult akin to intentionally misspelling America's name with three K's instead of a C.

Then she's laughably inept at handing out insults.

 

[GamezRule]

Well, the Tea Party is concerned about the rise of islamocommunazism, so maybe they are worried about the rise of the Soviet Union.

 

[Arakhor]

And someone attempting to become the leader of one of the world's most powerful nations should not be casually insulting other powerful nations in such a laughable manner.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Yes, but she obviously meant South Korea.

Everyone makes mistakes...

But not everyone's a politician.

Obama's comment was about the number of states... big deal. People will care more about healthcare or the economy.

But Palin's and Bachmann's were about foreign policy, and if they're to be President, they should know what they're talking about. HOW can you confuse South Korea and NK? How can you confuse Russia's capitalist democracy with the Soviets' communist totalitarianism?

Though Pelosi's comment is just blatantly idiotic of course.

It's foreign policy-related comments that I pay the most mind for most reasons.

I think Bachmann calling Russia the Soviet Union was a similar mistake, although it was quite a bit more embarrassing due to the extreme change in their government and basic philosophy.

And the fact it's a foreign policy measure. Imagine if she was President and she called them the USSR?

I guarantee it wouldn't fly!

 

[Traitorfish]

How can you confuse Russia's capitalist democracy with the Soviets' communist totalitarianism?

"Err, yes, how indeed?"

 

[Tani Coyote]

"Err, yes, how indeed?"

Well, Russia is ostensibly a capitalist democracy, at least, just as Western imperialism ended in... the 70s was it?

Given that the Russian elites want to at least keep that image and peddle it, it would be wise to respect it. They do still have the power, after all!

 

[Cutlass]

If they wanted people to respect their democracy they shouldn't have committed massive fraud in an election that they were going to win in any case.

 

[Traitorfish]

If they wanted people to respect their democracy they shouldn't have committed massive fraud in an election that they were going to win in any case.

Well, that depends on what you mean by "respect". Putin's an ex-KGB man, remember.

 

[Cutlass]

Well, that depends on what you mean by "respect". Putin's an ex-KGB man, remember.

Which means he really doesn't know the difference between "respect" and "fear".

 

[bombshoo]

And the fact it's a foreign policy measure. Imagine if she was President and she called them the USSR?

I guarantee it wouldn't fly!

I think you are vastly overrating the importance of something like this. The Japanese certainly didn't stop taking us seriously when George Bush puked at a meal with Miyazawa.

The Russians are people too, and can understand a simple mistake, as long as she apologized anyways. All that would happen is everyone would have a little laugh and that would be the end of it. Even if she went as far as making a really boneheaded slip, like calling Taiwan or Tibet an independent country, I can't realistically see it damaging our relations with China all that much. There is simply much more important things for everyone to worry about.

As Formaldehyde said, the real issue here is in her policies. If we let the stupid little mistakes overshadow what someone is actually saying, we are really misplacing our priorities.

 

[Traitorfish]

Which means he really doesn't know the difference between "respect" and "fear".

In Russia, they don't conceptualise blue as we do, but, rather, regard light blue and dark blue as two wholly different colours, as much as we regard red and pink as distinct colours. If you see what I'm getting at.

 

[Tani Coyote]

The Russians are people too, and can understand a simple mistake, as long as she apologized anyways.

I get the strangest feeling she won't.

She's the leader of a camp that decries "socialism" and whatnot, and likely believes in American supremacy. Meaning, she's not gonna be nice to Russia, who's not keen to roll over and be America's dog despite its loss of superpower status.

 

[Cutlass]

In Russia, they don't conceptualise blue as we do, but, rather, regard light blue and dark blue as two wholly different colours, as much as we regard red and pink as distinct colours. If you see what I'm getting at.

I actually don't speak oblique all that well.

 

[Ajidica]

I would worry far less about her take on Russia then what she might say with regards to the Middle East. She did say that she was going to take off the politicaly correct glasses when viewing America's foreign policy if she wins the nomination.
There is a small chance she could do that in a good way and start criticizing Israels actions in Palestine for violating international law and holding them to resolution 242.
I don't see that happening though.

 

[bombshoo]

I get the strangest feeling she won't.

She's the leader of a camp that decries "socialism" and whatnot, and likely believes in American supremacy. Meaning, she's not gonna be nice to Russia, who's not keen to roll over and be America's dog despite its loss of superpower status.

Well that's the real issue then, which is much more wrapped up in her policies than her ability to speak coherently.

Nonetheless, if it was an honest slip of the tongue, there is no reason not to apologize. It's not exactly giving in to the Ruskies if you are apologizing for a simple little slip, especially when you said something you know is simply factually wrong. If she thinks it's true that is an issue. If she has too much pride to apologize, that is also an issue. Misspeaking isn't the issue, and making it into one is both unfair to the candidate by not giving them a fair chance, and the voters by clouding what's really important.

Of course, if I were Bachmann I would have apologized already, but then again the Russians don't seem to be expressing offense at the comment (as far as I know), so there isn't much need too.

 

[Traitorfish]

I actually don't speak oblique all that well.

I'm suggesting that our deal pal Vladimirovich is not merely confused as to the distinction between respect and fear, but dwells in a conceptual universe in which such a distinction would be fundamentally nonsensical.